Duchess of Cornwall Jewellery 6: February 2008-

[branchg]

Originally Posted by scooter

I'm sure she has access to the treasures accumulated over the years by the Royal Family. If for example, she was wearing a gown of carribean blue to some event, I'm sure she can send a request thru her staff to see if there were any aquamarines available. Whats the point of having all that stuff if it never gets worn?

The Queen is pretty stingy with the royal collection of jewels. She rarely lends pieces out to members of the royal family.

Camilla has the use of The Queen Mother's collection from what we've seen.

[jcbcode99]

That's a nice collection to be able to use, in my own opinion. The emerald drop earrings alone are amazing, in my personal opinion.

[iakynthi]

Thank you all for the information!!I was a little bit surprised that Camilla recieves jewels as gifts from the Saudi King.Why is that?Does the BRF have such strong relationship with this King?

[jcbcode99]

They've all received serious jewels from the Saudi Royals--Diana received that fabulous sapphire suite (the one she buried), HM has received beautiful jewels from them--rubies and diamonds, etc.... I think even Sarah got some rubies.

[Boris]

NONE of the jewels which were given to Camilla during official tours are owned by her. They belong to the Royal Collection.
The guidelines declaring official gifts as Royal Collection property were first put down in 1995. Their newest update and currently valid version is from 2003.
See link:
http://www.royal.gov.uk/LatestNewsandDiary/Pressreleases/2003/Guidelinesandproceduresrelatingtogifts.aspx

[jcbcode99]

I believe that Camilla's jewels that have been given to her are in fact part of the Royal Collection, which they should be. Does that mean that Sophie's rubies are part of the royal collection as well? I confess, I get a muddled about what is and is not in the collection at times.

[Boris]

The whole issue IS muddled where any piece of jewelry dating back to before 1995 is concerned, because in contrast to for example the Dutch regulations, the guidelines about the official gifts to the Windsors do not state that they're meant to be retro-active.
Regarding Sophie's rubies (I don't remember them): If they were given as an official gift, of course they belong to the Royal Collection as well, and not to the Countess.

[Boris]

As for tiara events attended by Camilla: March 30th, state banquet for the President of Mexico, who is on a state visit to Britain.

[rubies]

I would love to see Camilla in a tiara and whole suite of sapphires!!

[branchg]

Any jewels presented to The Queen or other members of the royal family while on official business or during a state visit have always been accepted on behalf of the Crown to be worn in right of it. That practice dates back to Queen Victoria and is not new.

Jewels given as a private gift (i.e. a wedding present) are not taxed and belong to the individual as their private property. They can choose, as Camilla did, to accept the gift on behalf of the Crown for the royal collection, but it's not required.

Whether they pay taxes on the gift or not is done on a case-by-case basis by the Keeper of the Privy Purse in consultation with The Private Secretary to The Sovereign.

Originally Posted by Boris

NONE of the jewels which were given to Camilla during official tours are owned by her. They belong to the Royal Collection.

The only piece of jewelry Camilla indicated was accepted on behalf of the Crown was the spectacular ruby and diamond necklace she received from Prince Al Waleed bin Talal during their official visit to Saudi Arabia.

She has received other jewels from the Saudi royal family, including sapphires and diamonds, which may have been wedding gifts. These are her private property unless she states otherwise, just as they were for Princess Diana.

[jcbcode99]

So, back to Camilla and her jewels--I do wonder if she will be going to Sweden for CP Victoria's wedding and what jewels we might see her in--but more importantly, between now and then, are there any tiara events? I have grown weary of seeing the Honeycomb tiara.

[muriel]

Prince Charles And Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall Brazil Tour - Day 2 - Pictures - Zimbio

Not sure if anybody has noticed, but Camilla appears to have a new string of quite sizeable pearls, seen on the picture taken on their tour of South America

[MARG]

Originally Posted by branchg

The Delhi Durbar diadem . . . . . It was extensively remodeled for Camilla to fit as a tiara and was a wedding gift from The Queen.

I know this is the wrong thread but I do not believe that the Delhi Durbar diadem was "extensively" or otherwise remodeled for Camilla's use.

I also believe the that Queen Elizabeth has given Camilla exclusive rights of usage "for the duration" so to speak, thus ensuring that significant and historical pieces stay within the family and do not end up being willed ouside the main line in the BRF and being sold by descendents.

Please feel free to move this post to where it should be.

[branchg]

Originally Posted by MARG

I know this is the wrong thread but I do not believe that the Delhi Durbar diadem was "extensively" or otherwise remodeled for Camilla's use.

I also believe the that Queen Elizabeth has given Camilla exclusive rights of usage "for the duration" so to speak, thus ensuring that significant and historical pieces stay within the family and do not end up being willed ouside the main line in the BRF and being sold by descendents.

The Delhi Durbar was a originally designed to be worn high on the head as a diadem. It was definitely "opened up" so Camilla could wear it as a tiara more comfortably.

Given that Camilla is the second wife of Prince Charles and they do not have any children, it would make sense that any royal jewels would return to the Crown after her death and/or be left to William and Harry's wives in the future.

[muriel]

Originally Posted by branchg

The Delhi Durbar was a originally designed to be worn high on the head as a diadem. It was definitely "opened up" so Camilla could wear it as a tiara more comfortably.

Given that Camilla is the second wife of Prince Charles and they do not have any children, it would make sense that any royal jewels would return to the Crown after her death and/or be left to William and Harry's wives in the future.

There is no doubt that the Delhi Durbar was remodelled after the Durbar. What I am not sure about is whether the change for it to be used as a tiara and not a diadem was done under the instructions of Queen Mary (quite like she had the Culinan and the Cambridge emeralds removed) or more recently, specifically for Camilla.

[noldorlord]

I think that it was just the frame that was changed and 2 new elements to replace the larger stones- didn’t the Queen Mother wear it once?

[muriel]

Originally Posted by noldorlord

I think that it was just the frame that was changed and 2 new elements to replace the larger stones- didn’t the Queen Mother wear it once?

The QM wore it in 1947. Are you suggesting the changes were made specifically for Camilla or were previously made?

[noldorlord]

Originally Posted by muriel

The QM wore it in 1947. Are you suggesting the changes were made specifically for Camilla or were previously made?

No I would say that the changes were made before it was given to the QM, by Queen Mary. I think that because of the designe if the frame is removed that it can be made to close or widen at the need of the wearer.

[Stefan]

Originally Posted by muriel

There is no doubt that the Delhi Durbar was remodelled after the Durbar. What I am not sure about is whether the change for it to be used as a tiara and not a diadem was done under the instructions of Queen Mary (quite like she had the Culinan and the Cambridge emeralds removed) or more recently, specifically for Camilla.

When it was later remodelled then during them time it ws in the posession of the Queen Mother as it was on an exhibition in the Vicotira and albert Museum in i believe 2000 and then it looked the same way how it looks today.

[colynsmomma]

So any tiaras on the state visit from mexico?